While I don't agree with strong arming into the use of something, I do
believe that this discussion is one of many that defines one that is much
more fundamental.
If you are "connected" - define "connected". If you are "not-connected" it
pretty easy to define.
If we simply say that "not connected or decoded" is what we call unassisted
and let that group compete as has been historical and say "connected" allows
for a whole host of bi-directional connections - including but not limited
to remote receiving, RBN, manual packet spots, and scoreboard updating -
then the dialog becomes much more fundamental and much less about a specific
topic. The same discussion could be had about remote receiving and is
actually doing so on the topband reflector right now.
The real issue here in my view is that the assisted crowd is on a slippery
slope of allowing all that which is implementable once connected. It's a
losing battle once the first bite of the apple has been taken.
I prefer to stay focused on what I enjoy about the sport in the unassisted
class. Those enjoying harvesting the connected class may find that its hard
to control the "level" of connectivity and all that enables. Buyer beware.
Ed N1UR (NV1N)
Always unconnected and quite enjoying it. I have never been frustrated with
bad packet spots nor packet pileups other than on the receiving end.
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|